Roy Blunt on Free Trade Republican Jr Senator; previously Representative (MO-7)

Lifting tariffs is a move in the right direction

White House press release on reactions from Missouri officials on trade & tariffs:
• Gov. Mike Parson (R-MO): "Japan ended longstanding trade restrictions on US beef. This is more proof trade takes patience and a tough negotiator. HUGE step forward for our cattle farmers and ranchers, because Missouri is a top 10 beef producer."
• Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-MO): "The U.S., Canada, & Mexico agreed to lift all Sec. 232 steel & aluminum tariffs, including retaliatory tariffs! This is a huge relief for agriculture as our North American allies are some of our largest markets. I hope this propels momentum for my colleagues to pass USMCA."
• Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO): "Today's announcement by the Trump administration is a significant move in the right direction. Lifting these tariffs will help ensure we have an economy that continues creating jobs and building things in our state--from bass boats and beer cans to airplanes and pickup trucks." Source: White House press release on 2018 Missouri Senate race , May 21, 2019

  Supports presidential Trade Promotion Authority

  America's economic security and national security are closely related. Commercial markets overseas support millions of American jobs and promote American values. Roy believes in creating American jobs through trade and investment around the world.

  Granting Trade Promotion Authority to the president was a top priority for Roy. Spearheading "listening groups" with his colleagues, Roy worked to communicate the importance of allowing the president to negotiate trade deals with foreign countries to open up new markets to American goods and services, creating new jobs for working Americans.

  Source: Vote-USA.org on 2010 Missouri Senate incumbents , Nov 23, 2010

  Voted YES on promoting free trade with Peru.

  Approves the Agreement entered into with the government of Peru. Provides for the Agreement's entry into force upon certain conditions being met on or after January 1, 2008. Prescribes requirements for:
  • enforcement of textile and apparel rules of origin;
  • certain textile and apparel safeguard measures; and
  • enforcement of export laws governing trade of timber products from Peru.

  Proponents support voting YES because:

  Rep. RANGEL: It's absolutely ridiculous to believe that we can create jobs without trade. I had the opportunity to travel to Peru recently. I saw firsthand how important this agreement is to Peru and how this agreement will strengthen an important ally of ours in that region. Peru is resisting the efforts of Venezuela's authoritarian President Hugo Chavez to wage a war of words and ideas in Latin America against the US. Congress should acknowledge the support of the people of Peru and pass this legislation by a strong margin.

  Opponents recommend voting NO because:

  Rep. WU: I regret that I cannot vote for this bill tonight because it does not put human rights on an equal footing with environmental and labor protections.

  Rep. KILDEE: All trade agreements suffer from the same fundamental flaw: They are not self-enforcing. Trade agreements depend upon vigorous enforcement, which requires official complaints be made when violations occur. I have no faith in President Bush to show any enthusiasm to enforce this agreement. Congress should not hand this administration yet another trade agreement because past agreements have been more efficient at exporting jobs than goods and services. I appeal to all Members of Congress to vote NO on this. But I appeal especially to my fellow Democrats not to turn their backs on those American workers who suffer from the export of their jobs. They want a paycheck, not an unemployment check.

  Reference: Peru Trade Promotion Agreement Implementation Act; Bill H.R. 3688 ; vote number 2007-1060 on Nov 8, 2007

  Voted NO on assisting workers who lose jobs due to globalization.

  H.R.3920: Trade and Globalization Act of 2007: Amends the Trade Act of 1974 to allow the filing for trade adjustment assistance (TAA) by adversely affected workers. Revises group eligibility requirements for TAA to cover: (1) a shift of production or services to abroad; or (2) imports of articles or services from abroad.

  Proponents support voting YES because:

  Rep. RANGEL: In recent years, trade policy has been a dividing force. This legislation develops a new trade policy that more adequately addresses the growing perception that trade is not working for American workers. The Trade and Globalization Assistance Act would expand training and benefits for workers while also helping to encourage investment in communities that have lost jobs to increased trade--particularly in our manufacturing sector. The bill is a comprehensive policy expanding opportunities for American workers, industries, and communities to prepare for and overcome the challenges created by expanded trade.

  Opponents recommend voting NO because:

  Rep. McCRERY: We should be considering trade adjustment assistance in the context of trade opportunities generally for US workers. That is to say, I think we should be considering modifications to our assistance network in the context of the pending free trade agreements that are before the Congress. Unfortunately, we are not doing that. We are considering TAA in isolation. [We should instead] restructure TAA from a predominantly income support program into a job retraining program. Other problems include that H.R. 3920 would:

  • pointlessly keep people in trade adjustment assistance longer.
  • increase TAA spending by billions of dollars, but would not require any further accountability on how program funds are spent.
  • greatly expand TAA and exacerbate the inefficiencies in the program today.
  • extend benefits to public sector workers and submit State and local officials to subpoenas and legal proceedings to comply.
  Reference: Trade and Globalization Assistance Act; Bill HR3920 ; vote number 2007-1025 on Oct 31, 2007

  Voted YES on implementing CAFTA, Central America Free Trade.

  To implement the Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement. A vote of YES would:
  • Progressively eliminate customs duties on all originating goods traded among the participating nations
  • Preserve U.S. duties on imports of sugar goods over a certain quota
  • Remove duties on textile and apparel goods traded among participating nations
  • Prohibit export subsidies for agricultural goods traded among participating nations
  • Provide for cooperation among participating nations on customs laws and import licensing procedures
  • Encourage each participating nation to adopt and enforce laws ensuring high levels of sanitation and environmental protection
  • Recommend that each participating nation uphold the International Labor Organization Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work
  • Urge each participating nation to obey various international agreements regarding intellectual property rights
  Reference: CAFTA Implementation Bill; Bill HR 3045 ; vote number 2005-443 on Jul 28, 2005

  Voted YES on implementing US-Australia Free Trade Agreement.

  United States-Australia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act: implementing free trade with protections for the domestic textile and apparel industries. Reference: Bill sponsored by Rep Tom DeLay [R, TX-22]; Bill H.R.4759 ; vote number 2004-375 on Jul 14, 2004

  Voted YES on implementing US-Singapore free trade agreement.

  Vote to pass a bill that would put into effect a trade agreement between the United States and Singapore. The trade agreement would reduce tariffs and trade barriers between the United States and Singapore. The agreement would remove tariffs on goods and duties on textiles, and open markets for services The agreement would also establish intellectual property, environmental and labor standards. Reference: US-Singapore Free Trade Agreement; Bill HR 2739 ; vote number 2003-432 on Jul 24, 2003

  Voted YES on implementing free trade agreement with Chile.

  United States-Chile Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act: Vote to pass a bill that would put into effect a trade agreement between the US and Chile. The agreement would reduce tariffs and trade barriers between the US and Chile. The trade pact would decrease duties and tariffs on agricultural and textile products. It would also open markets for services. The trade pact would establish intellectual property safeguards and would call for enforcement of environmental and labor standards. Reference: Bill sponsored by DeLay, R-TX; Bill HR 2738 ; vote number 2003-436 on Jul 24, 2003

  Voted NO on withdrawing from the WTO.

  Vote on withdrawing Congressional approval from the agreement establishing the World Trade Organization [WTO]. Reference: Resolution sponsored by Paul, R-TX; Bill H J Res 90 ; vote number 2000-310 on Jun 21, 2000

  Voted YES on 'Fast Track' authority for trade agreements.

  Vote to establish negotiating objectives for trade agreements between the United States and foreign countries and renew 'fast track' authority for the President. Reference: Bill introduced by Archer, R-TX.; Bill HR 2621 ; vote number 1998-466 on Sep 25, 1998

  Rated 41% by CATO, indicating a mixed record on trade issues.

  Blunt scores 41% by CATO on senior issues

  The mission of the Cato Institute Center for Trade Policy Studies is to increase public understanding of the benefits of free trade and the costs of protectionism.

  The Cato Trade Center focuses not only on U.S. protectionism, but also on trade barriers around the world. Cato scholars examine how the negotiation of multilateral, regional, and bilateral trade agreements can reduce trade barriers and provide institutional support for open markets. Not all trade agreements, however, lead to genuine liberalization. In this regard, Trade Center studies scrutinize whether purportedly market-opening accords actually seek to dictate marketplace results, or increase bureaucratic interference in the economy as a condition of market access.

  Studies by Cato Trade Center scholars show that the United States is most effective in encouraging open markets abroad when it leads by example. The relative openness and consequent strength of the U.S. economy already lend powerful support to the worldwide trend toward embracing open markets. Consistent adherence by the United States to free trade principles would give this trend even greater momentum. Thus, Cato scholars have found that unilateral liberalization supports rather than undermines productive trade negotiations.

  Scholars at the Cato Trade Center aim at nothing less than changing the terms of the trade policy debate: away from the current mercantilist preoccupation with trade balances, and toward a recognition that open markets are their own reward.

  The following ratings are based on the votes the organization considered most important; the numbers reflect the percentage of time the representative voted the organization's preferred position.

  Source: CATO website 02n-CATO on Dec 31, 2002

  Insist on access to post-mad-cow Japanese beef markets.

  Blunt signed S.RES.452 & H.RES.1196
  RESOLUTION Supporting increased market access for exports of United States beef and beef products to Japan.
  • Whereas, in 2003, Japan was the largest market for US beef, with exports valued at $1,400,000,000;
  • Whereas, after the discovery of 1 Canadian-born cow infected with bovine spongiform encephalopathy ([known as "mad cow disease"] or BSE) disease in Dec. 2003, Japan closed its market to US beef, and still restricts access to a large number of safe US beef products;
  • Whereas for years the US has developed and implemented a multilayered system of interlocking safeguards to ensure the safety of US beef, and after the 2003 discovery, the US implemented further safeguards to ensure beef safety;
  • Whereas a 2006 study by the USDA found that BSE was virtually nonexistent in the US;
  • Whereas, from 2004 through 2009, US beef exports to Japan averaged roughly $196,000,000, less than 15% of the amount the US sold to Japan in 2003, causing significant losses for US cattle producers; and
  • Whereas, while Japan remains an important trading partner of the US, this unscientific trade restriction is not consistent with fair trade practices, nor with US treatment of Japanese imports:
  Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that--
  1. it is not in the interest of either the US or Japan to arbitrarily restrict market access for their close partners;
  2. trade between the US and Japan should be conducted with mutual respect and based on sound science;
  3. since banning US beef in Dec. 2003, Japan has not treated US beef producers fairly;
  4. both Japan and the US should comply with guidelines based on sound science;
  5. Japan should immediately expand market access for US exporters of both bone-in and boneless beef beyond the existing standard of beef from cattle 20 months and younger; and
  6. the President should insist on increased access for US exporters of beef and beef products to the market in Japan.
  Source: Resolution on Japanese trade 10-SR452 on Mar 11, 2010

  Declare Turkish rebar subject to anti-dumping duties.

  Blunt signed declaring Turkish rebar subject to anti-dumping duties

  Excerpts from Letter from 31 Senators to the Secretary of Commerce: We write to you regarding countervailing duty and antidumping investigations being conducted by the Department of Commerce on imports of steel reinforcing bar (rebar) from Turkey and Mexico.

  Rebar is one of the largest volume steel products produced in the US, employing more than 10,000 workers in over 30 states. With nearly 7 million tons of domestic production, a healthy rebar industry is critical to a strong economy. However, it is our understanding that imports from Turkey and Mexico are surging into the US, nearly doubling from 2011 to 2013.

  The ITC recently found that Mexican and Turkish rebar producers are consistently underselling US producers, resulting in substantial lost sales and depressed; [plus] a preliminary finding that the Government of Turkey bestows energy subsidies to its rebar industry, but that such subsidies are only de minimis in value. This seems surprising given the inherently energy-intensive nature of steel production.

  Opposing argument: (Heritage Foundation, "Guide to Antidumping Laws", July 21, 1992) One of the pillars of the "fair trade" approach is a set of so-called antidumping and countervailing duty laws. Antidumping laws seek to prevent products manufactured overseas from being sold by foreign firms in the U.S. at "less than fair value." Countervailing duties seek to offset subsidies provided by foreign governments by imposing duties at the U.S. border.

  The antidumping laws are confusing and arbitrary, and in many instances merely allow American firms to secure punitive tariffs against competing importers where no unfair trade practices are involved. Worse, these laws drive up the costs of imported components used by other American enterprises, making their products less competitive in world markets. As a result, American consumers pay higher prices for both imported and domestically produced goods.

  Source: Turkish Rebar Letter 14LTR-BAR on Apr 9, 2014

  Voted FOR reauthorizing Ex-Im Bank.

  Blunt voted NAY Export-Import Bank Reform and Reauthorization Act

  Heritage Action summary of vote# S206: The Senate voted to table (kill) an amendment by Sen. Kirk to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank. Sen. Kirk recommends voting NO. Heritage Foundation recommends voting YES because the "Ex-Im Bank is little more than a $140 billion slush fund for corporate welfare."

  OnTheIssues explanation: Voting NO would allow a vote on reauthorization of the Ex-Im Bank. Voting YES would kill the bill for reauthorizing the Ex-Im Bank.

  Congressional Summary from previous Ex-Im bill S.824; the Ex-Im Bank shall:
  • Provide technical assistance to small businesses on how to apply for financial assistance;
  • Establish programs under which private financial institutions may share risk in loans & guarantees.
  • The Bank may enter into up to $25 billion worth of contracts of reinsurance or co-finance.
  Sierra Club reason for conditionally voting NO (from previous bill S.819):Sen. Shaheen's bill S.824 reauthorizes the Ex-Im Bank without undermining Obama's Climate Action Plan. The Sierra Club supports the bill because it makes both financial and environmental sense for the US and all of its taxpayer-backed financial institutions--including Ex-Im--to stop investing in dirty and dangerous fossil fuels like coal.

  Cato Institute reason for voting YES to kill the bill:The Ex-Im Bank's reauthorization buffs contend that Ex-Im fills a void left by private sector lenders unwilling to provide financing for certain transactions. Ex-Im's critics [say that] by effectively superseding risk-based decision-making with the choices of a handful of bureaucrats pursuing political objectives, Ex-Im risks taxpayer dollars. It turns out that for nearly every Ex-Im financing authorization that might advance the fortunes of a single US company, there is at least one US industry whose firms are put at a competitive disadvantage. These are the unseen consequences of Ex-Im's mission.

  Source: Supreme Court case 15-S0995 argued on Oct 19, 2015

  Rated 88% by the USAE, indicating support for trade engagement.

  Blunt scores 88% by USA*Engage on trade issues

  Ratings by USA*Engage indicate support for trade engagement or trade sanctions. The organization's self-description: "USA*Engage is concerned about the proliferation of unilateral foreign policy sanctions at the federal, state and local level. Despite the fact that broad trade-based unilateral sanctions rarely achieve our foreign policy goals, they continue to have political appeal. Unilateral sanctions give the impression that the United States is 'doing something,' while American workers, farmers and businesses absorb the costs."

  USA*Engage at Work
  • Developing the Case: USA*Engage explains the benefits of economic engagement, and the high cost of sanctions for American exports, investment and jobs.
  • Education: We recruit respected foreign policy and economic experts to speak out against sanctions, actively engage the media and provide outreach to key target states and Congressional districts.
  • Contacting Government Officials: USA*Engage directly contacts Congressional, Administration, state and local officials.

  VoteMatch scoring for the USA*Engage ratings is as follows :

  • 0%-49%: supports trade sanctions;
  • 50%-74%: mixed record on trade engagement;
  • 75%-100%: supports trade engagement.
  Source: USA*Engage 2011-2012 ratings on Congress and politicians 2012-USAE on Dec 31, 2012

  Click here for definitions & background information on Free Trade. Click here for a Wikipedia profile of Roy Blunt. Click here for a Ballotpedia profile of Roy Blunt. Click here for SenateMatch quiz answers by Roy Blunt. Click here for a summary of Roy Blunt's positions on all issues. Click here for issue positions of other MO politicians. Click here for issue statements from MO primary archives. Click here for issue statements from MO secondary archives.
  Other candidates on Free Trade:		Roy Blunt on other issues:
  MO Gubernatorial: Chris Koster Eric Greitens Jim Neely Mike Parson Nicole Galloway Peter Kinder MO Senatorial: Angelica Earl Austin Petersen Claire McCaskill Jason Kander Josh Hawley Tony Monetti MO politicians MO Archives	Senate races 2019-20: AK: Sullivan(R,incumbent) vs.Gross(I) AL: Jones(D,incumbent) vs.Sessions(R) vs.Moore(R) vs.Mooney(R) vs.Rogers(D) vs.Tuberville(R) vs.Byrne(R) vs.Merrill(R) AR: Cotton(R,incumbent) vs.Mahony(D) vs.Whitfield(I) vs.Harrington(L) AZ: McSally(R,incumbent) vs.Kelly(D) CO: Gardner(R,incumbent) vs.Hickenlooper(D) vs.Madden(D) vs.Baer(D) vs.Walsh(D) vs.Johnston(D) vs.Romanoff(D) vs.Burnes(D) vs.Williams(D) DE: Coons(D,incumbent) vs.Scarane(D) GA-2: Isakson(R,resigned) Loeffler(R,appointed) vs.Lieberman(D) vs.Collins(R) vs.Carter(D) GA-6: Perdue(R,incumbent) vs.Tomlinson(D) vs.Ossoff(D) vs.Terry(D) IA: Ernst(R,incumbent) vs.Graham(D) vs.Mauro(D) vs.Greenfield(D) ID: Risch(R,incumbent) vs.Harris(D) vs.Jordan(D) IL: Durbin(D,incumbent) vs.Curran(R) vs.Stava-Murray(D) KS: Roberts(R,retiring) vs.LaTurner(R) vs.Wagle(R) vs.Kobach(R) vs.Bollier(D) vs.Lindstrom(R) vs.Grissom(D) vs.Marshall(R) KY: McConnell(R,incumbent) vs.McGrath(D) vs.Morgan(R) vs.Cox(D) vs.Tobin(D) vs.Booker(D) LA: Cassidy(R,incumbent) vs.Pierce(D)	MA: Markey(D,incumbent) vs.Liss-Riordan(D) vs.Ayyadurai(R) vs.Kennedy(D) ME: Collins(R,incumbent) vs.Sweet(D) vs.Gideon(D) vs.Rice(D) MI: Peters(D,incumbent) vs.James(R) MN: Smith(D,incumbent) vs.Carlson(D) vs.Lewis(R) vs.Overby(G) MS: Hyde-Smith(R,incumbent) vs.Espy(D) vs.Bohren(D) MT: Daines(R,incumbent) vs.Bullock(D) vs.Collins(D) vs.Mues(D) vs.Driscoll(R) vs.Giese(L) NC: Tillis(R,incumbent) vs.E.Smith(D) vs.S.Smith(R) vs.Cunningham(D) vs.Tucker(R) vs.Mansfield(D) NE: Sasse(R,incumbent) vs.Janicek(R) NH: Shaheen(D,incumbent) vs.Martin(D) vs.Bolduc(R) vs.O'Brien(f) NJ: Booker(D,incumbent) vs.Singh(R) vs.Meissner(R) NM: Udall(D,retiring) vs.Clarkson(R) vs.Oliver(D) vs.Lujan(D) vs.Rich(R) OK: Inhofe(R,incumbent) vs.Workman(D) OR: Merkley(D,incumbent) vs.Romero(R) vs.Perkins(R) RI: Reed(D,incumbent) vs.Waters(R) SC: Graham(R,incumbent) vs.Tinubu(D) vs.Harrison(D) SD: Rounds(R,incumbent) vs.Borglum(R) vs.Ahlers(D) TN: Alexander(R,incumbent) vs.Sethi(R) vs.Mackler(D) vs.Hagerty(R) TX: Cornyn(R,incumbent) vs.Hegar(D) vs.Hernandez(D) vs.Bell(D) vs.Ramirez(D) vs.West(D) VA: Warner(D,incumbent) vs.Taylor(R) vs.Gade(R) WV: Capito(R,incumbent) vs.Swearengin(D) vs.Ojeda(D) WY: Enzi(R,incumbent) vs.Ludwig(D) vs.Lummis(R)	Abortion Budget/Economy Civil Rights Corporations Crime Drugs Education Energy/Oil Environment Families Foreign Policy Free Trade Govt. Reform Gun Control Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Jobs Principles Social Security Tax Reform Technology War/Peace Welfare Other Senators Senate Votes (analysis) Bill Sponsorships Affiliations Policy Reports Group Ratings
  Contact info: Fax Number: 202-225-5604 Mailing Address: Rayburn HOB 2229, Washington, DC 20515 Phone number: (202) 225-6536

  
  
  
  
  
  Page last updated: Jul 17, 2020 Лучший частный хостинг